Category Archives: Economy

Slow Growth Forecasted

James Pethokoukis has an article at Reuters talking about a new economic paper released from Northwestern University economist Robert Gordon forecasting very slow growth in the United States over the next 20 years. This is heavily impacted by current fiscal policies and affects future fiscal policies. Here’s the key paragraphs:

America faced a similar turning point a generation ago. During the Jimmy Carter years, the Malthusian, Limits to Growth crowd argued that natural-resource constraints meant Americans would have to lower their economic expectations and accept economic stagnation — or worse. Carter more or less accepted an end to American Exceptionalism, but the 1980 presidential election showed few of his countrymen did. They chose growth economics and the economy grew.

Now they face another choice. Preserve wealth, redistribute wealth or create wealth. Hopefully, President Barack Obama will choose door #3. Investing more in basic research (not just healthcare) would be a start, as would slashing the corporate tax rate. A new consumption tax would be better for growth, but only if it replaced the current wage and investment income taxes. Real entitlement reform would help avoid the Reinhart-Rogoff scenario. The choices made during the next few years could the difference between America in Decline or the American (21st) Century.

Remember the wonderful projections of deficits ranging between 500 billion and 1.2 trillion dollars a year over the next 10 years? Bad news: that assumes much more robust growth rates, resulting in a lot more tax dollars coming in. If Robert Gordon is on the right track, the graph below is a overwhelmingly optimistic projection.

Whoa.

Don’t Give Up

Time to get political again. That’s really why I have this blog, after all; this is where I feel free to speak my mind and if it annoys someone out there, bummer. For those with blood pressure issues, I have my family blog that’s entirely safe from such things. Today though, on this blog, I’m linking to this spectacular entry by Dr. Zero over at Hot Air Blog. It’s called “A Word to the Weary“, and it basically says, yeah, things are bad, but don’t give up. Keep fighting. It’s a scary, wonderful, and inspiring post. It’s not a rah-rah Republican piece, but centered upon freedom. The start:

I get a lot of email from people who ask if the final degeneration from capitalism to collectivism is now inevitable. Entitlements are never repealed, after all, and we just got saddled with a back-breaking entitlement, piled atop a national debt that was already crushing us. It seems like it would take a miracle just to undo the damage Barack Obama has done in a single year… and that would just get us back to where George Bush left us. Dependency, unemployment, economic contraction, and socialist politics are a perpetual-motion engine of national decline.

A couple points I’d like to make. First, don’t ever mistake this: neither party can be absolutely trusted with your life, happiness, and freedom. Keep them honest and be willing to turn on them in a heartbeat if you catch them betraying their promises. Second, I have no idea how bad or chaotic these political and financial upheavals are going to be, but I am fairly certain that the past few years represents just the tip of the iceberg. Anyone with a lick of sense sees our national debt and projected deficits over the next decade and can see that.

When that systemic crash does come — and it will — how bad and painful it will be is being affected by our actions today in a very real way. It can be looked at as a sliding scale. The more dependent the citizenry are upon the machine of government, the more painful the crash will be. The more independent they are, the softer the transition will be.

One Geeky Correction

Over at the Belmont Club, Richard Fernandez writes:

Congressman Paul Ryan has had considerable success lately explaining the main problem with health care — and with “social democracy” — in general: it’s unsustainable. It’s an old message which has until recently taken a back seat to the idea that the welfare state was the wave of the future. OpenLeft argued that the hidden message of Star Trek was that in the future humanity would establish a socialist paradise. “The most familiar utopian socialist society would be that of the United Federation of Planets in the popular television series Star Trek – particularly that depicted in The Next Generation. There is no money, no want, no poverty, no crime, no disease or ignorance in human society; everyone works for the advancement of all humanity — as well as the rest of the Federation.”

One correction: Star Trek isn’t a socialist paradise. Do you ever about taxes? I believe the idea is that through amazing (TECH THE TECH) advances, goods such as food, clothes, housing, transportation, and even advanced tech like those cool iPads they all carry have prices approaching zero. So, the only reason one would work are 1) for personal satisfaction of some sort, or 2) to acquire whatever scarce goods are still available, such as collector’s items of something or services that require human contact. I can think of all sorts of ways a person may get those still-scarce items without “money”. But it’s not socialist per se, but just a hyper abundant society. Government doesn’t tax (no money!) and doesn’t own the means to production, as I’ve seen episodes where people have their own replicators. That’s about as individual of means of production as you’re going to get.

Bob’s Red Mill is Now Employee Owned

Wow. I love Bob’s Red Mill. My wife and I shop at the company store every chance we get. They sell great quality grains, legumes, among other types of food, and in bulk, if you want it. I just had some of their 13 bean soup mix on Ash Wednesday, actually. The employees there have always been top notch and very helpful to us. All this is a backdrop for the bombshell that was dropped today: Bob Moore — the founder and owner of the company — is giving the entire works to his employees. Considering they only have 209 employees, this is a big, big deal:

“This is Bob taking care of us,” said Lori Sobelson, who helps run the business’ retail operation. “He expects a lot out of us, but really gives us the world in return.” Moore declined to say how much he thinks the company is worth. In 2004, however, one business publication estimated that year’s revenues at more than $24 million. A company news release issued this week stated that Bob’s Red Mill has chalked up an annual growth rate of between 20 percent to 30 percent every year since.

Wow. As an employee of a privately-held company, you really can’t expect this. You make an agreement to do your job at the best of your ability for an agreed upon package, mostly being salary. No complaints there, but this is pretty much a dream for these workers. Instead of only the executives getting the package, they’re all getting it. Neat.

We’ll find out now, I guess, how much of their success had to do with Bob Moore himself, and his company can keep succeeding so wildly at what they do. I know I’ll keep spending my cash there (from another privately held company, by the way).

Here’s a video about it on ABC News that, unfortunately, I’m unable to embed.

Obama, Hayek vs. Keynes, and Of Course, Rap

When the first two stimulus packages were passed, many citizens were nodding their heads, saying to themselves it made sense. At the same time, most of political establishment did the same nodding, egging on the spending. It makes sense, right? Private spending is down, so the Federal Government spends big to cover at least some of the gap, therefore stimulating more spending? Not so fast, though. It’s actually not that obvious, and is hardly settled economic theory. It’s an old argument, too, going back to the first half of the 20th century, notably as a disagreement between the theories of John Maynard Keynes and Friedrich Von Hayek.

So, in the dawn of the second decade of the 21st century, how does one get caught up on these theories? YouTube, of course. A RAP video on YouTube.

Back? Good. Now, two years after the first stimulus under GW Bush, and a year after a much larger version under Obama, how’s the economy going? But don’t worry: they’re getting ready to pass a third one, if they can find the votes (watch for it under the term “jobs bill”). Does this invalidate Keynes’ theories? Maybe, but there’s a good argument to be made that Obama isn’t really following his proscriptions anyway. Money magazine has a great interview laying out this idea.

My opinion is this: as soon as Keynes came out with this spend big theory, politicians everywhere danced, laughed, and danced a bit more. This gave them a scientific excuse to borrow money that we don’t have to spend on pet projects, on what contributors would like pumped up, and on buying votes from eager constituents. It was a license to spend, and spend big, all under the cover of what the experts say should be done. This goes for both parties, so it’s not a partisan thing. So yeah, I’m a big fan of Hayek.

I’ll end with this: it can’t go on forever. It might go on for a long, long time yet, but you can’t keep increasing the national debt at rates like this and not have to pay a terrible price someday.

Ruralpolitans?

I’m not sure how I feel about that particular made up word. It sounds like some ice cream containing hay. Anyway, this piece on the Wall Street Journal is as interesting as it is true.

Before his family moved to rural Clatskanie, Ore., Mr. Wiles says he was a classic “urban liberal” dweller, frequenting microbreweries, coffee shops and bookstores. Now his family lives on five acres where, in addition to horses, they also own goats and turkeys, among other animals.

He and his wife run an employment-services company for people with disabilities. One travels 60 miles to Portland several times a week for business; otherwise, they work from home. Mr. Wiles has learned to operate a compact tractor and built a horse shed, and he has acquired several guns. “Look, we’re not survivalists and storing powdered milk or anything like that, but if the s—- hits the fan, I can grow all the food I want and take care of my family,” he says. “It’s liberating.”

Yup. And this sort of view point shouldn’t be looked upon as strange or alarming. A guy wanting to take care of his family by setting up supplemental and backup systems of support, such as food production. This is a good thing, for both that family and for the country. Still, I think his comment is pretty funny. Oh my! You’re one of those powdered milk storing survivalists! Apparently the amount of powdered dairy one has is inversely proportionate to their sanity level.

John Stossel on Health Care Reform

John Stossel nails it talking yesterday on Reason Online about health care reform. This is definitely one of those “read it all” pieces. Here’s the start, though, as a teaser:

It’s crazy for a group of mere mortals to try to design 15 percent of the U.S. economy. It’s even crazier to do it by August.

Yet that is what some members of Congress presume to do. They intend, as the New York Times puts it, “to reinvent the nation’s health care system.”

Well, John, it’s only crazy if you think it’s about improving efficiency. There are three reasons why this health care bill is being pushed: the reason for moderates, the reason for the true believers, and the real reason.

For the moderates, it’s being sold as a way to “fix” the system by making it more efficient and saving tons of money in the process for “the American taxpayer”. This is demonstratively false, and really, an outright lie. The reason why the polls keep reversing against Obama is because people are figuring this out.

For the true believers, it’s being sold as making the system more “fair”. This is the reason for Obama’s conference call with the lefty bloggers out there, reassuring them that no matter what he says, it’s going to be a socialist system (in so many words). This is a lie too, but more insidious. The upper class in Britain and Canada can still get better health care than the working rabble, make no mistake. The price for ensuring that the poorest get free health care is that the middle class majority get less quality and less choice. Fair? No, not really, depending on your point of view.

So, what’s the real reason? Power. Pure, naked, narcotic-like corrupting power. To gain control of 15% of the national economy in one fell swoop is a power grab not seen since the Great Depression. If the President succeeds in getting this passed, it’ll make the working rabble that much more beholden to the Government for yet another basic, needed service, and make it that much easier for Democrats to get elected. How many large scale government programs in the United States have ever been repealed? Oh yeah, zero.

These Are the Smart Guys?

Innocent Bystanders has been tracking the actual unemployment rate these past few months against what Team Obama said would be the unemployment numbers if the Trillion Dollar Stimulus package passed, and what it would be if it didn’t pass. Holding the country hostage via fear, uncertainty, and doubt? You betcha. It’s one thing if it would have worked, but guess what? They weren’t even close. So wait, these are the smart guys we’re supposed to trust, like, way more than the last guys?

Why Do People Hate Clean Energy So Much?

Or so I’m reading from this news piece on OPB. They go on to describe efforts in eastern Oregon to kill other clean energy projects because the turbines hurt some people’s poor, delicate senses of what is natural and beautiful.

All this back and forth is a strange thing if you look at it from a Left and Right, Republican and Democrat perspective. Don’t fall into that trap, though. This is really a localized version of a fight that dictates what goes on in Washington, D.C. all the time: special interest groups duking it out in the lobbying area and the public perception arena. You have four groups fighting in this particular case: the businesses putting up the actual money to build the towers, the clean power/wind power groups, the wildlife protection groups, and the property owner groups. The second and third are usually associated with the Left, and the last really reflects the demographic make up of wherever the property owners are from.

Using this perspective, it makes a lot more sense to me how Leftist groups can be fighting so hard to kill something that falls so obviously under the Leftist ideals. Clean power, with no CO2 emmissions, no nuclear waste, no smog, and whatever they say, a lot less effect on the wildlife than hydroelectric.

I’ve linked to it before, but if you haven’t, read the essay The Coming of the Fourth American Republic by James V. DeLong over at AEI’s site. Everything that goes on — at least at the Federal level — becomes a lot clearer when you understand that special interest groups pretty much run the system. And that’s a feature, not a bug.

To Jammie Thomas: I’m Boycotting All Recording Artists With the RIAA

I’ve had enough. For years I’ve seen the Recording Industry Association of America make a mockery of their customers, common sense, and fair play. I love music, though, and I really respect a lot of the artists that are represented by the RIAA. Yesterday, though, I read this story about a verdict handed down in the trial of the RIAA versus Jammie Thomas-Rasset:

The $1.92 million verdict against a Minnesota woman accused of sharing 24 songs over the Internet could ratchet up the pressure on other defendants to settle with the recording industry — if the big fine can withstand an appeal.

This is the result of a retrial, by the way, so it’s not like this is some one-off crazy jury. She downloaded 24 songs off of Kazaa, a popular file sharing software, and made those songs available to others. Boom: lawsuit. She fought it, mistakenly thinking that you can depend on the courts and the U.S. legal system (I’m not that much of a cynic, mind: usually you can, but not always). Years later, after a retrial was allowed, a jury hands down a judgment against her for $80,000 per song. Because, you know, that’s how much money the recording industry might have lost due to her evil machinations. I don’t use that word carelessly, either: it was decided that her actions were “willful”. Right. Like this woman decided to get those horrible industry executives, managers, and oh, especially the artists.

Listen: the intellectual property system needs to change. The whole mess needs to be rethought, refactored, and redesigned from the ground up. Regular work-a-day artists aren’t going to make this happen themselves, and I understand that. The thing that’s pushed me over the edge is the fact that the RIAA doesn’t have to do this. It’s a choice they make. The law gives them the power to go after people like Thomas-Rasset for “damages”, and they don’t pass those laws. They have a choice to exercise that power or not. And they choose to. The RIAA’s reaction:

“We appreciate the jury’s service and that they take this as seriously as we do. We are pleased that the jury agreed with the evidence and found the defendant liable. Since day one, we have been willing to settle this case and we remain willing to do so.”

So to heck with them, and to heck with any artist that’s represented by them. This is Arstechnica said about the ruling:

The recording industry lawyers, though clearly pleased, had no desire to showboat this one. The massive damage award, which increased from $9,250 per song in the first trial to $80,000, might sounds like a “win,” but will probably stoke grassroots anger against the industry’s campaign…

From now on, I will only buy music by way of used CD’s, or from artists who are either self-published or on labels not represented by the RIAA. Here’s a list of the RIAA member labels. I’ll be checking this from now on with every purchase. I encourage more people to do the same.

Things need to change. Keep voting at the ballot box, but vote with your dollar, as well.